Sounds like Obama is going to be much more aggressive at the next debate:

President Barack Obama defended his debate performance last week by saying that he "was just too polite."

The president was asked about the debate on the Tom Joyner Morning Show earlier this morning, according to the Huffington Post.

"Well, two things. I mean, you know, the debate, I think it’s fair to say I was just too polite, because, you know, it’s hard to sometimes just keep on saying and what you’re saying isn’t true," Obama said in response to the question.

"It gets repetitive. But, you know, the good news is, is that’s just the first one. Governor Romney put forward a whole bunch of stuff that either involved him running away from positions that he had taken, or doubling down on things like Medicare vouchers that are going to hurt him long term."

He continued, "And, you know, I think it’s fair to say that we will see a little more activity at the next one."

__________________I think the young people enjoy it when I "get down," verbally, don't you?

Sounds like Obama is going to be much more aggressive at the next debate:

President Barack Obama defended his debate performance last week by saying that he "was just too polite."

The president was asked about the debate on the Tom Joyner Morning Show earlier this morning, according to the Huffington Post.

"Well, two things. I mean, you know, the debate, I think it’s fair to say I was just too polite, because, you know, it’s hard to sometimes just keep on saying and what you’re saying isn’t true," Obama said in response to the question.

"It gets repetitive. But, you know, the good news is, is that’s just the first one. Governor Romney put forward a whole bunch of stuff that either involved him running away from positions that he had taken, or doubling down on things like Medicare vouchers that are going to hurt him long term."

He continued, "And, you know, I think it’s fair to say that we will see a little more activity at the next one."

This reminds me of when Turner Gill said he "saw something" on the films he watched, and winked as if he had it all under control shortly before losing by 50 again.

Rural California and Northern California tend to be decidedly conservative.

SF and SoCal have hijacked the state's politics.

What California needs isn't even a regime change, it's a goddamn military coup. Just put a dictator in charge for a couple of years, have him smack all these whiny idiots upside the head and get that place back on track.

I can't believe that a state with the advantages that California has can be so screwed up. The amount of out-state money that place sucks into it is staggering. The state literally does everything well (geographically speaking) and yet it's going under. They can grow anything, farm anything, product anything and everyone would kill to live there. Yet somehow, some way, the state is a train wreck.

And it's built on the back of wildly liberal politics.

But yeah - lets do that. Lets follow the lead of the people like Nancy Pelosi that have run that state into a goddamn mountain despite being given advantages that no other state in the union have.

I hate the electorate so very much...

This use to be Reagan country. Astonishing what liberalism can do.

To borrow a famous commercial:

This is your state/California; This is your state on Liberalism/ any questions?

California Proposition 187 was on the November 8, 1994 general election ballot in California as an initiated state statute, where it was approved. However, it has never been enforced.[1] The goal of Proposition 187 was to make illegal aliens ineligible for public benefits. It came in the middle of a deep recession in California and was popular partly because the fiscal estimate from the California Legislative Analyst's Office said that it would save the state about $200 million/year.[2]
Proposition 187's approval was the first time that any American state passed legislation related to immigration.[3]
The day after Proposition 187 was approved by the state's voters, several groups filed federal lawsuits against it, including the Mexican-American Legal Defense/Education Fund (MALDEF), the League of Latin American Citizens (LULAC) and the ACLU.
Three days after Proposition 187 was approved, on November 11, federal district court judge Matthew Byrne issued a temporary injunction against the state of California, forbidding the enforcement of Prop 187. Federal judge Marianna Pfaelzer then issued a permanent injunction, pending a trial. The state of California asked in 1997 for the case to be dismissed and the injunction dropped, on the grounds that federal immigration law had changed in the meantime. The federal court denied the request that the case be dismissed. The state of California never appealed that decision, so the permanent injunction stands, and the case has never proceeded to trial.[

We tried to stop it, but, as those of you who are opposed to health care should know, when you win at the ballot box, the courts will overturn in favor of the statists agenda. They wanted our tax paid services to go to those who had not paid into the system, and therefore they got it, voter be damned.

They want gay marriage, and they will have it, voter be damned.

They want universal health care, with the federal government regulating every facet of your eating habits and what kind of health care you may receive, they will have it, voter be damned.